Governor Rick Perry walked on to the stage at the Tea Party debate last night as the official front runner according to the RCP average using a variety of polls from multiple organizations.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal sat in the audience as Perry's guest after issuing a statement giving Perry his endorsement.
Jindal released a statement Monday saying, “Rick Perry is the candidate who can lead our party to victory in 2012."
“His record on job creation simply cannot be beat, and the one million jobs he’s helped create as governor is a stark contrast to the 2.4 million jobs lost on President Obama’s watch."
If Americans watching the debate didn't already know that Perry was the front runner in the field of GOP candidates which include the Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman, they certainly would have figured it out fast enough by the way the GOP field of candidates piled up attacking Rick Perry on stage.
The headline on the original NYT article read "Perry Wears a Bull's-Eye at G.O.P. Debate," yet when clicking the link provided over at Memeorandum, the headline now reads "Perry Is Target as Republican Candidates Take Aim."
Politisite.com has provided transcripts of the debate, part one , two, three and four.
As I said in a previous post about the last debate, people truly interested in the answers the candidates gave, but didn't watch the debate, can click the four links above and read those answers. Determine and interpret them yourselves, no one needs a political pundit, writer, reporter or blogger telling them what they should or shouldn't think.
What I noticed clearly from last night and I will quote the whole segment here below, is that while Newt Gingrich is not my candidate of choice, he kept his eye on the ball, which is to unseat Obama in 2012.
BLITZER: Governor Perry, speaking of Social Security, you’ve said in the past it’s a Ponzi scheme, an absolute failure, unconstitutional, but today you wrote an article in USA Today saying it must be saved and reformed, very different tone. Why?
PERRY: Well, first off, the people who are on Social Security today need to understand something. Slam-dunk guaranteed, that program is going to be there in place for those. Those individuals that are moving towards being on Social Security, that program’s going to be there for them when they arrive there.
But the idea that we have not had the courage to stand up and look Americans in the face, young mid-career professionals or kids that are my children’s age and look them in the eye and said, listen, this is a broken system. It has been called a ponzi scheme by many people long before me. But no one’s had the courage to stand up and say, here is how we’re going to reform it.
We’re going to transform it for those in those mid-career ages, but we’re going to fix it so that our young Americans that are going out into the workforce today will know without a doubt that there were some people who came along that didn’t lie to them, that didn’t try to go around the edges and told them the truth.
BLITZER: Governor Romney, you said that Governor Perry’s position on Social Security is, quote, unacceptable and could even obliterate the Republican Party. Are you saying he could not, as Republican nominee, beat Barack Obama?
ROMNEY: No, what I’m saying is that what he just said, I think most people agree with, although the term ponzi scheme I think is over the top and unnecessary and frightful to many people. But the real issue is in writing his book, Governor Perry pointed out that in his view that Social Security is unconstitutional, that this is not something the federal government ought to be involved in, that instead it should be given back to the states.
And I think that view, and the view that somehow Social Security has been forced on us over the past 70 years that by any measure, again quoting book, by any measure Social Security has been a failure, this is after 70 years of tens of millions of people relying on Social Security, that’s a very different matter.
So the financing of Social Security, we’ve all talked about at great length. In the last campaign four years around, John McCain said it was bankrupt. I put in my book a series of proposals on how to get it on sound financial footing so that our kids can count on it not just our current seniors.
But the real question is does Governor Perry continue to believe that Social Security should not be a federal program, that it’s unconstitutional and it should be returned to the states or is he going to retreat from that view?
BLITZER: Let’s let Governor Perry respond. You have 30 seconds.
PERRY: If what you’re trying to say is that back in the ’30s and the ’40s that the federal government made all the right decision, I disagree with you. And it’s time for us to get back to the constitution and a program that’s been there 70 or 80 years, obviously we’re not going to take that program away. But for people to stand up and support what they did in the ’30s or what they’re doing in the 2010s is not appropriate for America .
ROMNEY: But the question is, do you still believe that Social Security should be ended as a federal program as you did six months ago when your book came out and returned to the states or do you want to retreat from taht?
PERRY: I think we ought to have a conversation.
ROMNEY: We’re having that right now, governor. We’re running for president.
PERRY: And I’ll finish this conversation. But the issue is, are there ways to move the states into Social Security for state employees or for retirees? We did in the state of Texas back in the 1980s. I think those types of thoughtful conversations with America, rather than trying to scare seniors like you’re doing and other people, it’s time to have a legitimate conversation in this country about how to fix that program where it’s not bankrupt and our children actually know that there’s going to be a retirement program there for them.
ROMNEY: Governor, the term ponzi scheme is what scared seniors, number one. And number two, suggesting that Social Security should no longer be a federal program and returned to the states and unconstitutional is likewise frightening.
Look, there are a lot of bright people who agree with you. And that’s your view. I happen to have a different one. I think that Social Security is an essential program that we should change the way we’re funding it. You called it a criminal…
PERRY: You said if people did it in the private sector it would be called criminal. That’s in your book.
ROMNEY: Yeah, what I said was…
(APPLAUSE)
ROMNEY: Governor Perry you’ve got to quote me correctly. You said it’s criminal. What I said was congress taking money out of the Social Security trust fund is like criminal and that is and it’s wrong.
BLITZER: Congressman Paul, let me expand this conversation. Do you agree with Governor Perry that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?
PAUL: Well, I agree that Social Security is broke. We spent all the money and it’s on its last legs unless we do something. One bill that I had in congress never got passed was to prevent the congress from spending any of that money on the wars and all the nonsense that we do around the world.
Now the other thing that I would like to see done is a transition. I think it’s terrible that the Social Security system is in the — the problems it has, but if people wouldn’t have spent the money we would be OK.
Now, what I would like to do is to allow all the young people to get out of Social Security and go on their own. Now, the big question is, is how would the funding occur?
BLITZER: All right. Hold that thought for a minute, because I want Herman Cain to get involved.
Are you with Governor Perry that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?
CAIN: I don’t care what you call it, it’s broken. And here’s my solution.
(APPLAUSE)
CAIN: Start with optional personal retirement accounts. In 1981, the Galveston County employees, they opted out because that was a very short window of opportunity. They took it.
Today, when people retire in Galveston County , Texas , they retire making at least 50 percent more than they would ever get out of Social Security.
(APPLAUSE)
Secondly, allow younger workers to have personal retirement accounts as an option.
Now, to answer this gentleman’s question, current seniors will not be affected. It’s to give the option to the younger workers.
The Galveston County model worked, and it also worked in the small country of Chile . Instead of giving it to the states, let’s give it back to the workers. That’s what personal retirement accounts will do.
(APPLAUSE)
BLITZER: Governor Huntsman, when it comes to reforming Social Security, is anything from your perspective off the table?
HUNTSMAN: I don’t think anything should be off the table except maybe some of the drama that’s playing out here on this floor today. I mean, to hear these two go at it over here, it’s almost incredible.
You’ve got Governor Romney, who called it a fraud in his book “No Apology.” I don’t know if that was written by Kurt Cobain or not. And then you’ve got Governor Perry, who is calling this a Ponzi scheme.
All I know, Wolf, is that we’re frightening the American people who just want solutions. And this party isn’t going to win in 2012 unless we get our act together and fix the problem.
We all know that we’ve got entitlement problems, we’ve got Medicare, we’ve got Social — the fixes are there. I mean, the Ryan plan is there, for heaven’s sake.
We’ve got the answers. We don’t have leadership. That’s the problem.
BLITZER: Speaker Gingrich, would you raise the retirement age for Social Security recipients?
GINGRICH: No, not necessarily, but let me start with — I’m not particularly worried about Governor Perry and Governor Romney frightening the American people when President Obama scares them every single day.
(APPLAUSE)
GINGRICH: This is eating into my time.
Let me just say to all of you –
BLITZER: Let me just pinpoint the question. What would you do to fix Social Security?
GINGRICH: OK. But can I also expand for a second? Because that was not a rhetorical joke.
President Obama twice said recently he couldn’t guarantee delivering the checks to Social Security recipients. Now, why should young people who are 16 to 25 years old have politicians have the power for the rest of their life to threaten to take away their Social Security?
Gingrich then went on to answer the question.
Fact is, the GOP candidates trailing so far behind Rick Perry, sort of have to go on the attack because the initial spike Perry received in polling did not dwindle after the newness of his candidacy wore off, but instead started expanding and the candidates naturally felt the need to try to take him down a notch.
Personally I don't think Gingrich stands a chance of becoming the GOP nominee to go up against Barack Obama in 2012, but I do hope he stays in the race until the end, because he does know how to keep the endgame in mind, which isn't what Republican candidate eventually receives the nomination, it is the battle that begins afterward against Barack Obama's campaign to be reelected for four more years of his policies and agenda.
A CNN poll yesterday showed that Perry has a double digit lead over all the other candidates and that the plurality of Republican voters feel he is more electable against Obama in 2012.
I believe after last night's debate, that still holds true.
At this point I see this GOP primary as a lead up to Rick Perry preparing for a major boxing bout against Barack Obama and the GOP candidates that piled up on him last night are the sparring partners helping him prepare.
[Update] Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: 'Newt as VP?" - Last night I summed up my feelings on Twitter about Gingrich, writing that I “[d]on’t want him as our nominee, but love having him on our side.”
PS- Next debate will be presented by Fox News, on September 22.
.
